Tim Haddock

704 posts

Tim Haddock

Tim Haddock

@timjhaddock

Technology investor. Opinions are my own.

St Petersburg, FL Katılım Kasım 2017
215 Takip Edilen141 Takipçiler
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
@peterkrow Glad it was helpful Peter. When the facts change . . .
Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
0
14
Peter Krow
Peter Krow@peterkrow·
@timjhaddock Thanks Tim for this - great thoughts. Your view has evolved quite a bit since we spoke last year!
English
1
0
0
10
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
Even those that spent $100+mm are now in an unprecedented race to even sustain, much less improve terminal values. The half life of software innovation is diminishing quickly.
TBPN@tbpn

Could you actually vibe code Palantir? Co-founder @JTLonsdale says if you're building low-end SaaS, you're in trouble. But if you're spending $100M+ to build software, no one is replacing that: "I'm such a pro-AI bullish person, but it drives you to apostasy from the whole movement where they're like, 'We're replacing everything. Palantir is going down.'" "There's a lot of stuff that was bought by private equity, didn't take that much to build, and probably had more money put into sales than tech. That kind of stuff is in trouble." From his February appearance on the show.

Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
0
55
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
@a16z @alexwg @altcap @bgurley or anyone else: What are the terms for describing the token scalping and the output harvesting via (likely necessarily lengthy) token volume and baiting / next step suggestions that the big labs are doing in this moment? Because they are both insane!
Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
0
38
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
@TimSweeneyEpic is among the most principled and consistently purpose driven leaders in technology. You'll be better for having considered his thinking.
Tim Sweeney@TimSweeneyEpic

One battle was won just as another is raging. Meta lobbyists are pressing politicians around the world to pass tremendously privacy-invading and likely unconstitutional identity verification laws, forcing all citizens to upload personal identifying documents or biometrics to a huge variety of corporations in order to access services whose purpose is fundamentally about speech. Advocates for this are saying everyone’s private info won’t be stored and therefore can’t leak, but there are many cases where this isn’t so. Amateur developers who make mistakes are one reason - and if 10,000’s of services have to verify identities then some won’t be up to expected standards. Customer support channels are another case; if an automated process fails and customers email support agents then those documents are stored on additional servers, such as the Discord contractor’s servers that were hacked. Then there are dodgy corporations whose lawyers come up with clever theories allowing them to repurpose and broker data. And finally, there are lawsuits and regulatory investigations that require retaining documents for long periods of time. There are much better solutions that are not driven by vast power grabs by government and corporations: give parents the ability to manage their kids’ device accounts and make decisions about what features they can access. Apple, Google, Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, Disney, Valve, Epic, and many others have done exactly this. The best advocacy in this area is actually Apple’s. But it’s being ignored. It’s a tragedy of their own making that Apple has lost so much public trust by crying wolf with pretextual safety and security claims calculated to protect their App Store monopoly. Now that there is a looming privacy crisis and Apple has a truly good-faith solution based on parental controls, politicians are ignoring it to pursue the Meta lobbyists’ approach. Though the US has consistently overturned invasions into First Amendment rights, the campaign will probably succeed in most other countries, resulting in the digital world being a more corporatized, governmentized, and surveilled place.

Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
0
34
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
@patrick_oshag @nicbstme A few important refinements: 1. Domain expertise scales inversely with the digital expertise of the customer. SMBs, more than large enterprises, value the capability to digitize domain expertise more (i.e. improving customer business processes for them). Similar phenomena for digital (versus physical) output of the customer's business. Domain expertise is more nuanced. 2. Re: proprietary data. It's also now easier to capture and potentially leverage more unique data sets. See #1 for who is well positioned to bring this value to customers. It's end market specific, but also more nuanced. 3. Re: regulatory. Setting aside the obvious macro policy efficiency consequences that LLMs only amplify, yes of compliance. And although inevitably tethered to compliance, the narrow related lock in of customer (patient in the case of Epic) data file seems more tenuous. Not directly from LLMs, but by LLMs amplifying the loss of utility of those files not being more easily portable. Still a regulatory hurdle, but perhaps with a shift in dynamic. 4. Two refinements on SoR. One, SoRs should remain in control of the 'write' functionality work flow. If its SoR, it has to be right. Whether SoRs accomplish this is a separate question, but they should. Two, and not to overly diminish the real risk cited related to switching, horizontal SoRs should be ripe for being verticalized. But its a much more an open question whether or not horizontal providers can actually pull this off. This feels very much like a brewing competition. 5. And directionally yes on valuation, although for most the floor will be much closer to 3x revenues than 6x. But at ~3x, the returns potential seem more aligned with the likely future realities.
Patrick OShaughnessy@patrick_oshag

The best post I’ve read on software moats in the AI era

Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
0
27
Tim Haddock retweetledi
Barstool Philly
Barstool Philly@BarstoolPhilly·
Never forget
Barstool Philly tweet media
English
23
950
7.8K
149.4K
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
Nonsense. Assuming regulatory capture is largely neutralized, the shift will be from labors to craftsman, designers and creatives (albeit mostly digital). Not dissimilar to from the agrarian to industrial shift. Indeed, it seems likely that capital will end up with the shorter straw.
Dwarkesh Patel@dwarkesh_sp

New blog post w @pawtrammell: Capital in the 22nd Century Where we argue that while Piketty was wrong about the past, he’s probably right about the future. Piketty argued that without strong redistribution of wealth, inequality will indefinitely increase. Historically, however, income inequality from capital accumulation has actually been self-correcting. Labor and capital are complements, so if you build up lots of capital, you’ll lower its returns and raise wages (since labor now becomes the bottleneck). But once AI/robotics fully substitute for labor, this correction mechanism breaks. For centuries, the share of GDP that goes to paying wages has been 2/3, and the share of GDP that’s been income from owning stuff has been 1/3. With full automation, capital’s share of GDP goes to 100% (since datacenters and solar panels and the robot factories that build all the above plus more robot factories are all “capital”). And inequality among capital holders will also skyrocket - in favor of larger and more sophisticated investors. A lot of AI wealth is being generated in private markets. You can’t get direct exposure to xAI from your 401k, but the Sultan of Oman can. A cheap house (the main form of wealth for many Americans) is a form of capital almost uniquely ill-suited to taking advantage of a leap in automation: it plays no part in the production, operation, or transportation of computers, robots, data, or energy. Also, international catch-up growth may end. Poor countries historically grew faster by combining their cheap labor with imported capital/know-how. Without labor as a bottleneck, their main value-add disappears. Inequality seems especially hard to justify in this world. So if we don’t want inequality to just keep increasing forever - with the descendants of the most patient and sophisticated of today’s AI investors controlling all the galaxies - what can we do? The obvious place to start is with Piketty’s headline recommendation: highly and progressively tax wealth. This might discourage saving, but it would no longer penalize those who have earned a lot by their hard work and creativity. The wealth - even the investment decisions - will be made by the robots, and they will work just as hard and smart however much we tax their owners. But taxing capital is pointless if people can just shift their future investment to lower tax countries. And since capital stocks could grow really fast (robots building robots and all that), pretty soon tax havens go from marginal outposts to the majority of global GDP. But how do you get global coordination on taxing capital, when the benefits to defecting are so high and so accessible? Full automation will probably lead to ever-increasing inequality. We don’t see an obvious solution to this problem. And we think it’s weird how little thought has gone into what to do about it. Many more thoughts from re-reading Piketty with our AGI hats on at the post in the link below.

Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
1
122
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
I would love to see a robust analysis of true price informed demand. There is only small (arguably negliable) price informed demand signal currently, the primary culprit seemingly being the subsidies from big tech and VC dollars. Maybe this ultimately works similar to the progression seen with Uber et al, but in that instance the core values proposition was narrow and well established. In AI, the application level dependencies seem mulitfold and the true price informed demand signal seems complicated. Who has sought to unpack this?
English
0
0
0
50
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
After 20+ years on the UWS (mostly under Guiliani and Bloomberg) and now 5 years in Florida, the difference in how theses states are run is borderline surreal. Even our local DMV in Pinellas County, which is perpetually mobbed with users on one kind or another, runs like a well oiled machine.
English
0
0
3
549
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
@johnarnold Provided you have pure signal (i.e. you've not put your thumb on the scale), just wait until you are able to diagnose the outcome with hindsight. I suspect that will be even more eye opening.
Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
1
414
John Arnold
John Arnold@johnarnold·
Have a child going through the selective college admissions process for the first time and the system seems designed specifically to maximize stress for student and parents alike. The process has gotten worse in recent years and will will keep getting worse until it breaks. 1/n
English
112
87
1.5K
519K
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
If Netflix guarantees a near about unaffected market price for the stock portion of their consideration, they will win. See Verizon / MCI 2005. This move sealed it for Verizon despite the public protests of Qwest. If Netflix comes up short on this, Paramount should publicly point to this precedent.
Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
0
549
Culture Crave 🍿
Culture Crave 🍿@CultureCrave·
Paramount is now reportedly looking to launch a hostile bid for Warner Bros They feel their $30 a share all-cash offer is higher than what Netflix offered — in terms of cash, stock and the value of the cable business spinoff (via @CGasparino)
Culture Crave 🍿 tweet mediaCulture Crave 🍿 tweet media
English
1.4K
2.8K
32.8K
38.1M
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
@UFSportsAnalytx Here's another: Derrick Henry, just yesterday, 9.5 years into his professional career, just surpassed his high school rushing yards.
Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
1
31
UF Sports Analytics Lab
UF Sports Analytics Lab@UFSportsAnalytx·
Stat of the Week! Luka Doncic is the first NBA player in history to ever record over 400 PTS (414 PTS) and more than 100 AST (107 AST) in their first 12 games of a season.
English
1
0
0
130
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
@balajis AND the related axis of where true demand (i.e. price included) exists at each point along this continuum.
Tampa, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
0
17
Balaji
Balaji@balajis·
NO PUBLIC UNDISCLOSED AI That's my new heuristic after the last few years of seeing AI in practice. As context, there's a Laffer curve[a] for AI. The optimal amount of AI in most things is not 100% nor 0%. Because if you use 0% AI, it's slow, but if you rely on 100% AI, it's slop. The exact number is situational. But just knowing it's not 100% or 0% is actually a useful heuristic. That said, a few hard-and-fast rules are useful. So here they are: (1) Rule 1: don't use AI-generated text in public. Don't use AI-generated text in outbound emails, in DMs, or on websites. Because AI text is the new lorem ipsum, namely lorem aipsum. It's fine as a placeholder, for a prototype, but if you actually use it in production it's just verbose and cliche-ridden. It signals that you haven't actually put any thought into what you're writing. (2) Rule 2: don't use undisclosed AI imagery. Be cautious about how and where you use AI-generated images or videos, particularly ones where you haven't carefully fine-tuned the prompt. I didn't pattern match this until this year, because the tech is quite new, but by 2025 whenever I see slides with low quality AI-generated imagery, I think "ok, that's probably fake." You can still use AI imagery in prototypes, in fictional movies, or in graphic design contexts where it's obviously AI. And you can also use a lot of prompting with a tool like Midjourney to get high quality AI imagery that genuinely illustrates what's in your mind's eye. But, roughly, it's garbage-in, garbage out. If you didn't put a ton of effort into your AI images, if you didn't add a lot of information with your highly specific prompts and do many reps to pick the best one, the result will be obviously bad (and fake). (3) Rule 3: AI is fine in private, but disclose in public. You can use AI to research things or prototype things for your team or yourself, where it's obvious that what you're getting back is AI. However, be very cautious about using it in public without disclosure. Again, if I get a message that has obvious AI text in it, I think the sender is either lazy, or can't write, or has low reading comprehension, or hasn't put any thought into what they're asking about, or all of the above. Ironically, it signals the opposite of what early adoption normally signals! AI text in communications actually indicates low intelligence, or at least a total lack of savvy, rather than artificially high intelligence. If you put that together, it's a short rule: "no public undisclosed AI." (a) So you can use AI in private without disclosing, because it's just search results or raw data analysis for your team to review. (b) And you can use AI in public, with disclosure. And that disclosure could sometimes simply be the context, where it's an obviously fictional video or labeled a prototype. (c) And you have a more sophisticated rule than simply saying "no AI", which is highly suboptimal because 0% AI is slow in many contexts. What you just shouldn't do is use AI publicly (which includes cold emails or DMs) without disclosing it. This is in your interests as well, because by disclosing it the other party knows you aren't trying to pass off a quick AI search result or AI prototype as the real thing.
Balaji tweet media
English
110
109
644
91.3K
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
@FrancisSuarez @FrankLuntz Is a further breakdown of this 45% available? Between primary residence, secondary residence and commercial/other?
Lealman, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
0
48
Patrick OShaughnessy
Patrick OShaughnessy@patrick_oshag·
Anyone read a great essay or article lately?
English
93
18
446
119.9K
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
Wonderful story in addition to being beautifully written, somewhat ironically in a way the AI never could.
Patrick OShaughnessy@patrick_oshag

I first knew how incredible this authoritative profile of Josh Kushner and Thrive would be when the author, @JeremySternLA, sent me a 500-page document full of interview transcripts he’d done with members of the Thrive team. That dossier ended up being less than half the total background material reviewed to make this profile possible. But even still, what I didn’t expect was a story that swept this far back in history and became a series of vignettes about American history and culture coming together in a single firm, which has become one of the most important in technology, if not the most. Here is our profile of Josh Kushner, his team, and the institution they are building together

Dallas, TX 🇺🇸 English
0
0
2
85
Tim Haddock
Tim Haddock@timjhaddock·
Wise words (even as enterprise customers have long known this well), but there will be increasing demand for specialization, which customers have always wanted. The challenge will be remaining competitively focused, growing without adding too much complexity. This will take work.
Patrick OShaughnessy@patrick_oshag

Why AI won’t destroy existing software

St Petersburg, FL 🇺🇸 English
0
0
1
738